Citation Nr: 0006320
Decision Date: 03/09/00 Archive Date: 03/17/00
DOCKET NO. 95-31 708 ) DATE
)
)
On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Houston,
Texas
THE ISSUE
Entitlement to service connection for post-traumatic stress
disorder (PTSD).
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: Texas Veterans Commission
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
M.S. Lane, Associate Counsel
INTRODUCTION
The veteran served on active duty from April 1963 to February
1967. Service in Vietnam is indicated by the evidence of
record.
This matter comes to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board)
from a March 1995 rating decision by the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO), which determined
that new and material evidence had not been submitted to
reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for PTSD.
In the March 1995 rating decision, the RO also denied the
veteran's claim of entitlement to non service-connected
pension benefits. The veteran subsequently appealed this
decision. In a November 1999 rating decision, the RO granted
the veteran's claim of entitlement to nonservice-connected
pension benefits. As this grant represents a full awards of
the benefit sought by the veteran, this matter is no longer
on appeal before the Board. See Grantham v. Brown, 114 F.3d
1156 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
In the March 1995 rating decision, the RO also denied a claim
of entitlement to service connection for arteriosclerotic
heart disease. By that decision, the RO further determined
that new and material evidence had not been submitted to
reopen a claim of entitlement to service connection for
bilateral periarthritis with hammertoes. To the Board's
knowledge, the veteran has not expressed disagreement with
these decisions. Thus, the Board finds that these issues are
not presently on appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.200, 20.201, 20.202,
20.302 (1999).
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. In a statement dated February 22, 2000 and received by
the Board prior to the promulgation of a decision in this
case, the veteran stated that he no longer wished to pursue
an appeal as to any claims still pending before the Board
because he was satisfied with the RO's allowance of his claim
of entitlement to a non service-connected pension benefits.
2. The only claim of the veteran that is currently pending
on appeal before the Board is his claim of entitlement to
service connection for PTSD.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
The issue of entitlement to service connection for PTSD
having been withdrawn by the veteran, the Board lacks
jurisdiction to further consider this claim on appeal and
therefore it is dismissed. 38 U.S.C.A. § 7105 (West 1991);
38 C.F.R. § 20.204(b) (1999).
REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION
Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7105, the Board may dismiss any appeal
which fails to allege specific error of fact or law in the
determination being appealed. A Substantive Appeal may be
withdrawn in writing at any time before the Board promulgates
a decision. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.202, 20.204(b) (1999).
Withdrawal may be made by an appellant or by his or her
authorized representative, except that a representative may
not withdraw a Substantive Appeal filed by the appellant
personally without the express written consent of the
appellant. 38 C.F.R. § 20.204(c) (1999).
In August 1995, the veteran submitted a Substantive Appeal
(VA Form 9) regarding the issues of entitlement to service
connection for PTSD and entitlement to nonservice-connected
pension benefits; thereby perfecting his appeal with respect
to both of those issues. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.200, 20.202 (1999).
Thereafter, in a November 1999 rating decision, the RO
granted the veteran's claim of entitlement to nonservice-
connected pension benefits. In February 2000, the RO issued
a letter to the veteran notifying him that his claims file
was being forwarded to the Board for consideration of the
remaining "issues" that had been placed on appeal.
In March 2000, prior to the promulgation of a decision in
this case, the Board received a signed statement from the
veteran in which he acknowledged that he had been awarded
entitlement to nonservice-connected pension benefits. In
this statement, which was dated February 22, 2000, the
veteran indicated that shortly after receiving notification
of his award, he received another letter from the RO
regarding another appeal he had filed. The veteran then
stated that to the best of his knowledge he had no further
claims pending before the Board on appeal. He further
stated, "however - I wish to withdraw the appeal this letter
refers to."
In this case, the Board is of the opinion that the veteran
has withdrawn his appeal as to the issue of entitlement to
service connection for PTSD. Although the veteran did not
specifically refer to this issue in his February 2000 letter,
he did indicate that to the best of his knowledge he had no
other appeals pending; and that, in any event, he wished to
withdraw his appeal as to any remaining issues. Thus, the
Board believes that the veteran has withdrawn his appeal as
to the issue of entitlement to service connection for PTSD,
and that there remain no allegations of errors of fact or law
for appellate consideration. Accordingly, the Board does not
have jurisdiction to review the appeal and it is dismissed
without prejudice. See Sabonis v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 426,
430 (1994) (where the law and not the evidence is
dispositive, the claim should be denied or the appeal to the
Board terminated because of the absence of legal merit or the
lack of entitlement under the law).
ORDER
The appeal is dismissed without prejudice.
Barry F. Bohan
Member, Board of Veterans' Appeals